On 11/12/13 13:44, Simen Kjærås wrote:
I've tried to figure out good ways to add some sorely-needed implicit conversions to the language, but I'm sure there are details that need to be ironed out. In other words - destroy!
Since you brought up std.complex: some of the issues here are subtle. For example, it's appropriate to allow implicit conversion from numerical => Complex (although this can be done fairly readily by just calling complex(x) where x is a numerical type); it's also appropriate to allow implicit conversion from Imaginary => Complex; but it'd be wrong to allow implicit conversion from numerical => Imaginary.
Conversely, I'm not certain whether it'd be appropriate to allow implicit conversion Complex => numerical or Complex => Imaginary, even if the imaginary or real parts respectively were zero.
